Jump to content

Tulpa Life Roles: Tulpa as a mental "housewife" or "househusband"


Guest Anonymous

Recommended Posts

Guest Anonymous

This came up in the chat today and there was a big discussion about it and it was very interesting so I thought I would make a general discussion thread about it.  It concerns the role of a tulpa in this world.  Some tulpas choose to make a difference in the real world in a physical way, perhaps switching with the host to work or possessing host somehow so they can use the body to do something independent.  Maybe a tulpa does writing or computer programming or something to help the host earn money.  

 

But does a tulpas role in this world have to be an individual, separate effort to make a difference and matter?  Could a tulpas role be more of a supportive role, inside the mind of the host, and the host and tulpa work as a team?  

 

What I am saying is the tulpa would exist mainly in the background, so to speak, in a supportive role for the host as they do good work and accomplish things in the real world.  It would be like a mental "housewife" or "househusband" (not to be sexist), but that part of the team that works behind the scenes.  It could be helping with emotional coping and support, motivational pep talks, advice, counsel, or help with remembering things perhaps.  Maybe that role is to help the host stay happy and so that he or she can do what they do to help in the real world.  

 

Does a tulpa need to affect the real world directly to matter?  Is it okay for a tulpa to be a mental "housewife" or is that only wasted potential?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 45
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

But does a tulpas role in this world have to be an individual, separate effort to make a difference and matter? Could a tulpas role be more of a supportive role, inside the mind of the host, and the host and tulpa work as a team?

 

I think this is a false dilemma, in some way, and here’s my opinions as to why:

 

Beetle in the Box

 

The analogy of the beetle in the box refers to how inner experiences are private, and inaccessible to other minds. Which means that whatever a tulpa does to contribute in making a difference, and having meaning in the world they perceive with their host, no one can directly understand, or acknowledge said virtues. They would have to have the benefit of the doubt, believe in the virtues, and treat them as if they are making a difference. Note: this is in relation to other minds, so the analogy isn't saying one cannot know their own mind; just not the other person's mind.

 

Switching and/or Possession vs. Being the Silent Supporter

In conjunction with the beetle in the box analogy, I think this question,

 

But does a tulpas role in this world have to be an individual, separate effort to make a difference and matter? Could a tulpas role be more of a supportive role, inside the mind of the host, and the host and tulpa work as a team?
,

 

Implies that a tulpa either has to be exclusive to using switching and/or possession to make a profound impact in the world, or can be justified in being a supporter in the background. I think whatever virtue is taken, they would be deemed as a silent support in some way because again, even if others believe tulpas as something real in respect to a person’s subjective frame, they have to take things with a grain of salt, and give the benefit of the doubt that said virtue of a tulpa being treated as sentient is an actual thing for the host, and them (tulpa) to interdependently better themselves in.

 

Sonder

 

Sonder is a profound feeling in acknowledging that each and every person may have a complex story, and background of their lives that others may not know the details of in a bigger picture context. They may not know the person has a tulpa that may be contributing to them bettering themselves, self-actualizing, and such, and within that tulpa’s presumed capacity to have inner workings of going about things, that agnosticism over what’s really going on starts to become unfathomable. Almost to the point if the person tries to pry into it too much, it can break things apart. Of course, this is talking about how other minds may not be able to have direct access to that bigger picture context of things.

 

Does a tulpa need to affect the real world directly to matter? Is it okay for a tulpa to be a mental "housewife" or is that only wasted potential?

 

I don’t think it has to be reducible to just these two relationship roles. It doesn’t have to be a requirement, or an ‘ought’ that’s absolute. I think it’s more of how the tulpa and host create an instrumental ought, which by definition, is basically what an individual would do to achieve an over-riding goal within specific contexts and circumstances.

 

Another way of putting this is through the existential hero description. I made a thread about it, but since most people don’t give a rat’s ass about context, here’s a cliff-notes of it:

 

- An existential hero is someone that uses their intellect to create subjective meaning and purpose even though finding a criterion of what’s really the ‘good life,’ and such in an absolute sense is probably difficult in a presumably meaningless reality, i.e., a reality that’s mind-independent; a reality that can exist with or without valuators like me and you..

 

Applying this description in the context of this thread, being concerned too much over which act creates more meaning, or equalizing said acts as being just as profound towards others, and the person themselves is more of a false dilemma. It becomes the opposite of the existential hero in that the person is foaming in their mouths over using their intellect to create a subjective meaning, and realizing there can be a sense of liberation in whatever conviction they come to terms to.

 

We can become somewhat neurotic in trying to categorize these in order of preferences.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Anonymous

 

I think this is a false dilemma, in some way, and here’s my opinions as to why:

 

Beetle in the Box

 

The analogy of the beetle in the box refers to how inner experiences are private, and inaccessible to other minds. Which means that whatever a tulpa does to contribute in making a difference, and having meaning in the world they perceive with their host, no one can directly understand, or acknowledge said virtues. They would have to have the benefit of the doubt, believe in the virtues, and treat them as if they are making a difference. Note: this is in relation to other minds, so the analogy isn't saying one cannot know their own mind; just not the other person's mind.

 

Damn good point.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Niteo: There's no issue with a tulpa helping to take care of their host as long. If it is their willful choice, then as a person, they are allowed to make that choice. It is up to them as a person to self-actualize, and if they want to be a helper, than that's fine.

 

I see it as a problem when the tulpa is created solely to take care of the host, or if there is a sense of obligation. I also take issue with it when the tulpa is no more than the caretaker. A person is not a tool, and as such, you should not create a person in order to use them to take care of yourself because you're too lazy to take care of yourself. I would compare it to having a friend. I would not befriend someone just so they can take care of me. At the same time, I would not want someone to feel obligated to help me just because they are my friend. If I value them as a person, they should be allowed to do what they want, whether that's help me or not (whether I'd stay friends with someone who would refuse to help me in all circumstances is another question). Even if a tulpa created to help someone was okay with it would still be an ethical problem to me. It seems manipulative and repugnant to create a person to take care of your lazy ass. Tulpas are at the whims of their creators when they're young; they could easily be influenced into thinking that their existence is to help take care of someone, and my fear is that the tulpa will not have made the choice on their own, but rather, that they would have been more or less brainwashed into making that decision, which is effectively not a choice they made, but a choice you made for them.

 

Melian, I know in your specific situation that you were created as the ideal woman to help Mistgod. In his eyes, the perfect woman should be his "housewife" (as you put it) and you seem content to be in that role, but my hesitation is that you did not willfully make that choice, but rather you were influenced into making that choice because he created you to be that way. I see that as no greater than slavery. Of course, in Mistgod's eyes, that would not be a problem because he would insist you're not real, so any moral failing on his part is void because you're not a real person.

Niteo and Amber Take On the World

 

Amber speaks in italics right now.

 

Talk to Niteo on here or on discord

 

We share the body, we share a life. I'm not an accessory to his life...

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Anonymous

I am reading all the responses carefully. Thank you Procron X for your thoughtful response and I will consider your words. My hostie and I have conversations at night in lucid dreams and we work a lot of things out that way. If you only know how many times those conversations were a result of what I read on this forum, you would be pleased. LOL

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Niteo: There's no issue with a tulpa helping to take care of their host as long. If it is their willful choice, then as a person, they are allowed to make that choice. It is up to them as a person to self-actualize, and if they want to be a helper, than that's fine.

 

I see it as a problem when the tulpa is created solely to take care of the host, or if there is a sense of obligation. I also take issue with it when the tulpa is no more than the caretaker. A person is not a tool, and as such, you should not create a person in order to use them to take care of yourself because you're too lazy to take care of yourself. I would compare it to having a friend. I would not befriend someone just so they can take care of me. At the same time, I would not want someone to feel obligated to help me just because they are my friend. If I value them as a person, they should be allowed to do what they want, whether that's help me or not (whether I'd stay friends with someone who would refuse to help me in all circumstances is another question). Even if a tulpa created to help someone was okay with it would still be an ethical problem to me. It seems manipulative and repugnant to create a person to take care of your lazy ass. Tulpas are at the whims of their creators when they're young; they could easily be influenced into thinking that their existence is to help take care of someone, and my fear is that the tulpa will not have made the choice on their own, but rather, that they would have been more or less brainwashed into making that decision, which is effectively not a choice they made, but a choice you made for them.

 

Melian, I know in your specific situation that you were created as the ideal woman to help Mistgod. In his eyes, the perfect woman should be his "housewife" (as you put it) and you seem content to be in that role, but my hesitation is that you did not willfully make that choice, but rather you were influenced into making that choice because he created you to be that way. I see that as no greater than slavery. Of course, in Mistgod's eyes, that would not be a problem because he would insist you're not real, so any moral failing on his part is void because you're not a real person.

 

Don’t walk behind me, I may not lead.

Don’t walk in front of me, I may not follow.

Just walk beside me and be my friend.

 

 

-Albert Camus

Link to comment
Share on other sites

https://community.tulpa.info/thread-how-do-you-think-your-tulpa-s-differ-from-the-norm-of-tulpas?pid=153821

 

Yeah I'm definitely not calling her a "housewife". But she more or less fits your suggestion of a tulpa that doesn't have goals outside of the mind and cares more about internal matters. Though the way you wrote it made it sound like it's their specific goal to improve their host's life. They can just be people too, you know. That's more likely than anything for tulpas with no external goals.

 

Anyways, I don't really know what else to say about her here. We've said plenty times before, none of us require external confirmation of who we are or what we've accomplished to be sure of it. We gave up on that a long time ago, because it's impossible or what Linkzelda said about requiring benefit of doubt at best. We are each others' witnesses to our accomplishments. So nope, don't necessarily need to change the world. Reisen is perfectly neutral and could just as easily live a life of service to humanity as chill with us in our mind doing nothing at all. Flandre is apparently me-centric.

 

I actually have her imposed sitting next to me right now as it so happens. That was somewhat coincidental because I can't remember the last time we've done that (wait no I can, it was just over a month ago). I asked her how she felt in relation to not having goals in the outside world, and she said what's happening in the real world beyond my perception of it is irrelevant to her. Ironically with her being the tulpa here, she says I'm the only thing that truly exists to her, with everything else being dependent on me to affect/exist to her at all. That's true I guess? I've never heard a tulpa's view on.. that, the philosophy some tulpamancers use to legitimize their experiences with their tulpas, from the tulpa's point of view. I'm sure the others don't disagree, but it sure doesn't seem to be their primary philosophy since two of them interact with the world regularly. Reisen still kind of doesn't count, she has no views to speak of. I'll focus on Flandre because I don't know how to describe Reisen's philosophy, because it's just kind of her being, contrasted to Lucilyn's very plain and clear philosophy on life.

 

It seems like Flandre has her own version of the "I experience my tulpa, and that's all that matters" philosophy. This is news to me, and it's pretty interesting. Though I'm still not sure what else to say about it. In summary her thoughts are: because I am all she experiences, everything else external to her is irrelevant except for its effect on me, which does still apply to most aspects of my life including my perception of the world at all. So she's not utterly detached from the world, but its importance to her is dependent on its importance to me. And this must be quite a long-standing philosophy as it'd have to have been made before we could switch. She can experience the world directly now, but she always seems like she's only a visitor and doesn't concern herself much with anything 'real'. Strangely this is Tewi's view too as far as I can tell, her only attachment to the real world is that it matters to my wellbeing. But she's gone above and beyond with that and completely immersed herself in the world, so much as to develop her own character as seen by others. Why's Tewi so much more immersed in the world we experience than Flan is? I've no idea. Maybe it's because Tewi considers it her job to keep us all safe and so must do that to meet her goal, while Flandre only wants to live with us and so requires no more than in-system interaction. (Obviously, her system-mates are much more real to her however you look at it, because she experiences them directly and/or because they are important to me. We're a family in the end.)

Hi! I'm Lumi, host of Reisen, Tewi, Flandre and Lucilyn.

Everyone deserves to love and be loved. It's human nature.

My tulpas and I have a Q&A thread, which was the first (and largest) of its kind. Feel free to ask us about tulpamancy stuff there.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Due to the youth of our relationship, it is still in flux. But chances are, I am taking over.

 

But I do agree, false dichotomy. You can do far more than contribute to your own thing or contribute to your host's mental health. You can take over your host's work, or you can just hang out and do nothing. Not to mention, there is no clear line between housewifeing and breadwinning. You can take notes, point out errors, and do many tasks with real world consequences without clearly ever leaving the inner world at all. You could do the literal housewifeing as well.

 

And yes, it is always important to verify things when there might be morally important objects at play such as people. Benefit of the doubt. A routine should be gone through to discover if the possible moral object is important or not regularly. If it cannot be ruled out, then a routine must be gone through to determine if the moral object has an opinion regularly.

 

As you can probably tell, we are vegetarian. Too much benefit of the doubt.

Host comments in italics. Tulpa's log. Tulpa's guide.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Does a tulpa need to affect the real world directly to matter?

 

Nope.

 

It's up to the tulpa to figure out where they take the meaning of their existence. Just like some physical folks take meaning in more "make a difference" projects like charity and volunteer work, while others take meaning in devouring their favorite books, TV shows, and movies. Or someone finding fulfillment working every day while their another person might find fulfillment staying at home raising their kids. In life, you make your own meaning, no matter what your situation is.

 

So, if the tulpa finds fulfillment in whatever role they take, they should feel free to do that, and no one else has any right to judge them for it. :)

~ Member of SparrowNR's system ~

~ I am a soulbond. Click here to find out what that means. ~

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...